Forums Latest Members
  1. Tik-Tok of Oz Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    631
    Likes
    3,797
    Greeting all. Considering this cal 561 Connie. Seems too clean but lugs are sharp.
    Pics:
    039AF69B-660E-4F24-8E17-FC50C5B544E6.jpeg F3D510AF-4881-4188-B619-1FAF1F5E9746.jpeg 7A84C090-5C86-403A-B2EF-4B147A5FC7A5.jpeg AA0BBE8B-CFF9-4EEC-A732-21FF3B300131.jpeg B3C430FA-72BF-4DF6-91FA-1A03F02BC6DD.jpeg
     
    B77ED417-2046-474C-86F0-886AFEA95F8F.jpeg
  2. Noddyman Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    1,116
    Likes
    1,774
    I would say the contrary, the lugs look blunt and heavily polished.
    Also did the lack of ‘officially certified’ on the dials carry over from the 14902? Possibly it did which would tie in with the low movement serial number. Worth checking though before you go any further.
     
    Edited Jul 30, 2018
    efauser, krillan50 and Dan S like this.
  3. gdupree Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    902
    Likes
    1,560
  4. Tik-Tok of Oz Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    631
    Likes
    3,797
  5. Tik-Tok of Oz Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    631
    Likes
    3,797
    I thought it might be a 14777 when I looked at the face.

    Like this here: http://omega-constellation-collecto.../the-omega-constellation-jumbo-14777.html?m=1
     
  6. Noddyman Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    1,116
    Likes
    1,774
    There are a few references without ‘officially certified’ on the dial and 14777 is one of them. Usually in this case style (i.e. dog leg lugs) you expect to see reference 149xx. I think this one may be correct however @Peemacgee or @ConElPueblo may be able to shed more light.
     
    Tik-Tok of Oz likes this.
  7. Peemacgee Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungers Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    5,148
    Likes
    7,863
    The two line text did creep into the early 168s IIIRC.
    The serial number places it around the right time. Looks like a nice dial but those lugs really are soft.
     
    Tik-Tok of Oz and Noddyman like this.
  8. ConElPueblo Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,977
    Oddly enough, the 14902 I owned at one point did not lack the "officially certified" and had a higher serial number... So it's possible that the movement on either watch has been replaced ::confused2::


    That dial is lovely, btw. It's the same as on my 14902 and I've never seen a photo that could do it justice. Simply superb.

    [​IMG]

    https://omegaforums.net/threads/omega-constellation-14902-62.38758/
     
    Tik-Tok of Oz, felsby and Noddyman like this.
  9. Tik-Tok of Oz Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    631
    Likes
    3,797
    The lack of “officially certified” concerns me. And yours had sharper lugs. Thanks all for the input. I love this forum.
     
  10. hoipolloi Vintage Omega Connoisseur Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    3,516
    Likes
    5,795
    Dial looks repainted to me, serial # is too early for a 168.005.
    Don't buy it.
     
    Tik-Tok of Oz likes this.
  11. Tik-Tok of Oz Jul 30, 2018

    Posts
    631
    Likes
    3,797
    I thought The caseback and the caliber are consistent with the ones from 1962 And the 168.005 was in gold cap or stainless that year. And I thought the 19,xxxxxx at the earliest was also from 1962. Unless my sources were wrong.
    http://ialreadyhaveawatch.com/watch-articles/omega/omega-serial-numbers-by-year/

    http://download1582.mediafire.com/nyyxp2pkfkdg/alzlyy78pc15pil/Fullcalibresdata.V15.pdf

    But it could very well be a repainted dial.